Laserfiche WebLink
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />MINUTES FOR JUNE 15. 1998 <br />(//2 - //2368 Kirk Otteson - Continued) <br />Mr. and Mrs. Otteson were present. <br />Van Zomeren stated this application was considered at the May 18. 1998 meeting and was tabled <br />due to concerns about the proposed addition to the c.xisting structure and its impact on the ravine. <br />The building official has had an opportunity to visit the site and indicated that he docs not think the <br />proposed addition will have a negative impact on the ravine because of the existing vegetation <br />and that there would be little if any impact on the "top of the bluff' line. <br />Van Zomeren stated the applicant is requesting a hardcover variance to construct an addition and a <br />deck on the lake side of the existing residence. A bluff setback is required because the proposed <br />addition is located between the top of the bluff and the 30 foot bluff setback, u ith an average lakeshore <br />setback also being required. Van Zomeren noted the e.xisting hardcover is 3.100 square feet with the <br />proposed hardcover being 3,310. The applicant has proposed to exchange non-structural hardcover in <br />the driveway and sidewalk to add the decks and addition. Staff did not recommend rcmo\ al of the <br />sidewalk and parking area because of safct\‘ concerns. <br />There were no public comments. <br />Hawn noted this structure was built before the bluff ordinance w as in effect, but stated she is not <br />in favor of setting a precedent by allowing further encroachment into the bluff line. Hawn stated in the <br />past she has voted in favor of replacing or enclosing existing decks. <br />Otteson stated he was under the impression the Planning Commission was not opposed to the addition. <br />Stoddard remarked the Planning Commission attempts to look at each application on a case by <br />case basis, noting that in order to make a recommendation, the Planning Commission needs to know <br />whether this application falls within the bluff ordinance. Stoddard stated he did not have a <br />problem with the application, noting the building inspector did not feel it would have a negative <br />impact on the ravine. <br />Van Zomeren indicated it was her opinion that it docs fall w ithin the bluff ordinance due to the <br />rise of the land. <br />McMillan noted the bluff would make the lot almost unbifildablc if the residence w as new construction. <br />Chair Smith recommended that the possibility of erosion be taken into account. Chair Smith <br />pointed out that it is the Planning Commission's rcsponsibilit\‘ to assess the implications of the <br />ordinance as it relates to caeh particular property before a decision can be reached. <br />Roger Wickman stated they were under the impression from the previous Planning Commission <br />meeting that they needed to show the drainage impact on this propertv rather than the impact to <br />the bluff. <br />Chair Smith inquired whether the new addition could somehow be constructed without encroaching <br />upon the bluff. Smith also stated a need to reduce hardcov er w ithout remo\ al of the <br />sidewalk.